ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Call for comment: <draft-iab-doi-04.txt> (Assigning Digital Object Identifiers to RFCs)

2015-07-09 11:38:41
On 07/02/2015 09:39 AM, John C Klensin wrote:

--On Thursday, July 02, 2015 18:26 +0900 Randy Bush
<randy(_at_)psg(_dot_)com> wrote:

i would appreciate hearing from actual publishing academics on
the subject if doi would help them.
Too late.  The decision was made and implemented before the IAB
asked for a final review of these document.  So, whether
assigning DOIs to the RFC Series is a good idea or a bad one,
whether the format chosen for the DOI suffix is optimal or not,
etc., the discussion is essentially OBE.  At least as the IAB
has chosen to structure things, it needed to occur with the RFC
Editor and/or RSOC [1] many months ago.

I don't think it's too late to undo any of these things. Sure, identifiers already assigned should not be reassigned, but that doesn't mean that the process needs to continue for new RFCs, nor that identifiers for new RFCs should have to adhere to the same syntax as has previously been used, nor that existing RFCs cannot be assigned additional identifiers.

Keith


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>